Jean Chrétien

[The Constitution, June 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, first I would like to congratulate the hon. member on being confirmed in his position.

[Child Care, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we had a program and we submitted a proposal to the provinces. It was very clear that it was to be a cost shared program. We discussed it with the provinces, but the provinces were not interested in participating in an expanded program for child care.

As it is within provincial authority, and it was written that it had to be a joint program, and as the provinces did not want to move on it, we respected their jurisdiction and we did not move. We respected the constitutional responsibilities of the provinces as well as the national responsibilities.

[National Unity, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a copy of the speech from the throne on his desk. Everything he has asked can be found in it.

The Minister of Human Resources Development, for example, has moved on the labour management situation. We made propositions to the provinces in many fields in the speech from the throne. We hope to rebalance the federation. We want to clarify jurisdictions. We want to eliminate duplication. However, the Reform

Party is four months late on that issue and on everything else it is probably 40 years late.

[National Unity, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, all the people who came to the Hill yesterday would be very delighted to know that the Reform Party supports bilingualism in Canada. The people who came yesterday were from Montreal, Quebec, Pontiac and so on. Many of them were anglophones from Quebec who are in favour of the bilingualism policy of Canada which the Reform Party has always rejected.

A moment ago, the hon. member referred to distinct society. Again the contribution of the Reform Party was to vote against distinct society. I hope that some day the Reform Party will wake up. However, if we waited to have the support of the Reform Party in order to solve this Canadian problem we would have no solution. I guess we will have to solve the problem despite the Reform Party.

[National Unity, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to see that at long last, the Reform Party is interested in the future of Canada. When I stood in the House and told everyone that it was not possible to break up a country with a one-vote majority, I well remember the members of the Reform Party sided with the Bloc Quebecois on that issue.

I hope the Reform Party wakes up some day and reads the speech from the throne in which the program for national unity was very well stated. A big part of it will be completed after the meeting of the first ministers Thursday and Friday of next week.

[Referenda, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there are all kinds of accusations within this question which are not factual. We have respected all of the laws involved. I believe that the fact that some Canadians decided to travel to Montreal in this the freest country in the world, a country which allows separatist MPs within the Parliament of Canada, that MPs and other citizens of Canada wanted to go to tell Quebecers that they must remain in Canada, shows a respect for freedom of speech, which is entrenched in Canada's Charter of rights.

The first charter respecting the right of all citizens to freedom of speech was created in France. I hope that the people of the Bloc and the Parti Quebecois will respect the freedom of speech of all Canadians concerning the future of their country.

[Referenda, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing we want is to see democracy respected in Canada. There have been two referenda, and Canada won both times. We are not interested in seeing this continued. It is the Bloc Quebecois and the Quebec separatists who want to see it continued, while most of the people of Quebec and of Canada have had enough.

[Information Highway, June 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the member has just taken the words right out of my mouth. It was New Brunswick and Quebec together who succeeded in showing the Francophonie how to go about it.

In this sector, there is expertise in Quebec, and there is also expertise in New Brunswick and in Ontario; that is what Canada is all about. We have francophones in Canada who have to work in both languages and who can modify any American program in the field for use in French.

It was with great pride that I was able to demonstrate this to member countries of the Francophonie, all of whom have English speaking neighbours, such as in Africa, and who wanted to benefit from the expertise of Quebec, of New Brunswick and of Ontario. We will continue this promotion and show that Canada is a country that can run well.

[Information Highway, June 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, that is what we did in Cotonou in our presentation before all heads of government and heads of state of francophone countries.

There was a demonstration in which Canadians showed that we can use the Internet in both languages, English and French. This demonstration was put on by Canadian technicians using Canadian products, to my great pride. People could thus see that here in Canada we can work in English and in French, something that other francophone countries want to be able to do in the future.

[Cuba, June 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has very little sway over the United States Congress, which is empowered to pass legislation. What we did, and I am happy to have been the first government leader to raise the issue, was to stimulate interest in the international community.

As I just said, we contacted Mexico immediately. We also had a motion passed by all the Caribbean prime ministers, we are raising the matter at all public forums, and I think that the Americans are beginning to realize the legislation has little sense.

It is always rather difficult to discuss with Americans during an electoral period, it will perhaps be a little easier in November.